January
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
31
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 227 guests, and 6 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics35,087
Posts495,073
Members13,948
Most Online462
Aug 5th, 2016
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
On the periodic table of elements, Atomic number 26 has a chemical symbol of FE, the chemical name of Iron with an atomic weight of 55.845. Atomic number 6 has a chemical symbol of C, the chemical name of Carbon & an atomic weight of 12.011. Steel is not on the table, WHY, because it is not an Element. It is an alloy of Iron & Carbon. If we want to get "Technical" Iron contains NO carbon.

Most of the carbon contained in cast iron is not alloyed with the iron but is in a free state. IF you doubt this put a piece of it in a mill or on a lathe & do a bit of machining on it. You will find yourself very quickly covered with black sooty dust from all the free carbon being thrown off.

Steel can, & normally does, have more alloying ingredients than carbon alone, but the very act of alloying Iron with Carbon creates Steel. I have done no research into the actual creation of "Stainless Steel". I will say though I will have to have Absolute Definitive proof that any gun company was making stainless Steel barrels in 1926 for any type of firearm.

I have a .32-40 barrel from a model 1885 Win Hi-Wall plainly marked Nickel Steel Especially for Smokeless Powder. This steel was first used by WW in 1895 for barrel for the .30WCF (AKA .30-30) & later in the same year for the ..25-35 It is not "Stainless". Neither was the so-called Anti-Knit. An S&W early model 60, which was this company's first SST revolver or pistol, a 5 shot .38 Spl stainless version of the .38 Chief's Special has magnetic parts, Frame, Barrel & Cylinder. They are therefore NOT 18-8 nor any of the 300 series alloys. I may have seen, but if so do not recall, their exact alloy, but feel sure it is a 400 series which is both magnetic & contains enough carbon to be heat treatable. Their Cylinders have been stated as being heat-treated, which cannot be done with a 300 series stainless.

300 series stainless has a "Gummy" nature & any two parts rubbing together are a Total Disaster just waiting to happen. "Don't Ask Me How I Know".In machinist Lingo, they will "Gall", about like trying to rub two pieces of well-chewed bubble gum together.

It is my personal opinion, from some 35+ years experience of working with the stuff that 300 series SST has extremely limited usefulness in the manufacture of firearms. Feel free to prove me wrong if you like, but do it with "Cold Hard Facts". I do feel as if I have given enough basic facts to back up my opinion, they are not just based on Here-say.

PS; In the total scheme of things both 41xx & 44xx alloy steels are classified by the industry as "Low Alloy" steels.



Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,102
Likes: 3
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,102
Likes: 3
Thank you Miller.

And great news. I've got a chunk of Winchester Nickel Steel barrel coming. Will ask METL to do both composition analysis and tensile testing.
Mike Hunter is of course credible and this should confirm his statement that Nickel Steel was 3 1/2 % nickel and .30%-.40% carbon.

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,372
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,372
Originally Posted By: Drew Hause

Mike Hunter is of course credible and this should confirm his statement that Nickel Steel was 3 1/2 % nickel and .30%-.40% carbon.


If you really consider him credible, then why do you feel the need to confirm his findings?

Should we consider you credible when you state that testing of one Hunter Arms barrel can tell us about many of them... after you also posted this... or are we to believe that "AISI 1045 Rephosphorized Resulfurized Carbon Steel and Non-standard AISI 1018 with high phosphorus and sulphur" are substantially the same animal?

Originally Posted By: Drew Hause
It could be relevant that 2 Hunter Arms Armor Steel barrels were shown to be Non-standard AISI 1045 Rephosphorized Resulfurized Carbon Steel and Non-standard AISI 1018 with high phosphorus and sulphur.


It would appear that you don't even read the copy-and-paste "research" that you post here, let alone comprehend it.

And why should we consider you credible after your last gun barrel burst analysis thread where ferrous contamination at the point of the rupture somehow changed into manganese sulfide inclusions, or vise versa? Do you recall this Preacher?

Originally Posted By: keith
Originally Posted By: Drew Hause


Loitz vs. Remington Arms. Use of AISI 1140 Modified (with manganese sulfide) for shotgun barrels
https://law.justia.com/cases/illinois/supreme-court/1990/68367-7.html


The Preacher seems to be rather hung up on barrel steel containing Manganese Sulfide for some odd reason lately.

In the Southern Barrel Burst thread, Manganese Sulfide was postulated to be a contaminant in the braze joint at the area of barrel failure. Of course, this new revelation came a full day after the quoted report from the Metallurgists at METL said the braze joint contamination was ferrous in nature. Hmmmmm?

Originally Posted By: Drew Hause
METL's summary as bold bullet points
....

[b]• The braze was extensively contaminated, particularly near the suspected initiation site.
The contamination in the braze was ferrous and appeared to be heavily oxidized.

"The braze was examined at high magnifications. The region where contamination was observed was consistent with ferrous, oxidized debris. The braze material was consistent with a copper-zinc braze filler. Substantial contamination was observed throughout the inner braze surface. Cross-sections from the good and bad braze areas were taken and showed substantial difference in compositions between the braze material and the contaminated regions."




Miraculously, the next day, we were treated to EDX Spectrographs of Manganese Sulfide contamination that was now suddenly alleged to be the contamination in the braze joint. Wow... that is a pretty unusual (and questionable or miraculous) case of migrating contamination! I can find no information or reference that tells us that Manganese Sulfide inclusions in steel can somehow leach out or migrate into a braze joint to cause contamination. Maybe I just didn't look hard enough???

Of course, this strange observation contained several possible explanations for the presence of the evil Manganese Sulfide... with his metallurgist allegedly saying, "This could have occurred during the brazing process (likely) and been exaggerated over time by successive heating cycles, moisture, etc via possible alloy segregation effects, electromigration and such phenomena." Hmmmm? So just how often do double shotgun barrels go through "successive heating cycles over time"??? And is this guy really saying that MOISTURE causes or exaggerates Manganese Sulfide contamination or migration? Damn... no wonder the Titanic sunk! They put it in water!!!

I'm reminded of the old saying: "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance... baffle them with bullshit."

Yet now, in the Loitz vs. Remington Arms lawsuit link above, Manganese Sulfide inclusions are not a contaminant, but an INGREDIENT in AISI 1140 Modified barrel steel which has free machining characteristics. Even after losing this lawsuit, Remington continued to use 1140 steel which still contained inclusions of the evil Manganese Sulfide.

Again, we should remember that steel is not a totally homogeneous product. It is not a pure element. It is a mixture of numerous ingredients, and some inclusions are impurities while others are there to alter its' characteristics for various applications such as forging, machining, hardening, etc.

Note that out of 94 other blown-up Model 1100 Remington barrels introduced as evidence in this lawsuit, 89 owners admitted to using reloads, and only 5 claimed to be using factory ammo. But we did not see any actual proof of that claim by the 5 owners who said they were using factory loads. Remington apparently proof tested their barrels with a substantially higher than normal pressure load (18,000-22,000 psi). It was the opinion of Remington experts that the burst which initiated this lawsuit was the result of a load generating about 60,000 psi breech pressure.

Another very interesting point is that there were two Metallurgists who reached vastly different conclusions in this trial, and that Remington employed their own staff of expert Metallurgists.

This should remind anyone with a brain that even trained Metallurgists can see very different things in the same piece of steel, and that they obviously are not infallible. When one expert Metallurgist says that a barrel blew up due to a 60,000 psi overload, and another expert Metallurgist says the same barrel blew up due to bad steel with an normal factory load, they can't both be right.

In this case, I guess you just pick whichever explanation fits your narrative!

It is also interesting to note that less than .003% of Remington 1100 shotgun barrels have burst out of roughly 3 million produced, and Remington did not make a defective product recall to replace "defective" barrels containing this evil Manganese Sulfide. Millions of shotgun barrels containing the evil Manganese Sulfide are still in use, and are not blowing up.

It probably doesn't mean anything that this lawsuit and the subsequent appeals that went against a major firearms manufacturer occurred in the anti-gun Democrat stronghold known as Illinois. Hmmmmmm?



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

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,102
Likes: 3
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,102
Likes: 3
Gloria a Dios the 20g M12 Nickel Steel barrel arrived. It has what is almost certainly an obstructional burst centered about 6" from the muzzle. I'll work on some good images.
Should get a segment over to METL Friday morning for both composition and tensile strength testing.

BTW: The 1913 edition of “Halcomb Steel Co. Catalogue and Hints on Steel” is digitized https://archive.org/details/HalcombSteelCompanyManufacturesOfHighestGradeCrucibleAndElectric

The first electric arc furnace was developed by Paul Héroult, of France, in 1900. Héroult came to the U.S. in 1905 and Halcomb installed the first electric arc furnace in the U.S. in 1906. Sanderson Brothers installed an arc furnace in 1907.
p.48 “In the operation of the Héroult Process we start with molten open hearth steel as our “raw” material. (the electric furnace) removes sulphur, gases, oxides and slag, and at the same time (we) adjust the composition with accuracy and precision.”
“The Héroult Process permits less variation in alloying constituents by other process and even the percentages of easily oxidizable metals like chromium and vanadium are controlled with great accuracy. Having produced steel thoroughly deoxidized, chemically of greatest purity, free from slag and segregation…”

p.53 “3 1/2% Nickel Steels” (Ni 3.25% - 3.75%)
.20% C with Elastic Limit (Yield Strength) of 57,500 psi and Maximum (Ultimate Tensile) Strength of 82,000 psi
.30% C with E.L. 63,000 psi and M.S. 93,500 psi
.40% C with E.L. 65,000 psi and M.S. 94,000 psi

p. 57 has a “Specifications for Automobile Steel” chart as recommended by the SAE. This was long before the AISI standardization numbering system, but the chart documents the recommended concentrations of manganese (.5-.8), phosphorus (<.04), sulfur (<.04) and the alloys.

Mike Hunter has looked into the Forum, and hopefully he will comment after the results are in.

Page 3 of 3 1 2 3

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 - 2019 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+deb9u9 Page Time: 0.036s Queries: 22 (0.007s) Memory: 0.8335 MB (Peak: 1.8992 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2021-01-19 09:36:07 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS