• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Detonation ?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Just to muddy the waters a bit more, what about the possibility of a jolt of static electricity pasing from the person through the metal rod, and transfered to the barrel metal and to the powder? Don't know about humidity conditions that day, ect, but I think we have all seen sparks occasionally when we get "carpet shocks". :hmm:
 
WOW!- That's is VERY interesting- I wouldn't have thought ignition didn't happen- all those sparks & energy - intense yet nothing and again, yet, all it takes is a single white hot(similar in appearance to the sparks of electricity) scraping of steel from the 'hammer' and poof! Note that hammer,steel and frizzen are different names for the same part.
; Obviously, it's the conductivity of the powder that prevents ignition, but I wonder if this would change under different atmospheric conditions like humidity.
 
Note that hammer,steel and frizzen are different names for the same part.

What we call a hammer today, was called a "cock" on the flintlock. "Hammer" is a much later term. I don't believe the frizzen was ever referred to as the "hammer", except in you post. :: :peace:
 
Claude, FYI, I've actually stumbled across a couple articles over the past couple years that explained that what we call the frizzen today was originally referred to as the hammer.
Also, as it relates to the term "hammer-stall", referring to the leather sheath we slip over what we call the frizzen today

:)
 
Claude, FYI, I've actually stumbled across a couple articles over the past couple years that explained that what we call the frizzen today was originally referred to as the hammer.

I stand corrected. (It won't be the last time, either)

Sorry Daryl. ::

P.S. Was I right about the "cock". :crackup:
 
To really satisfy my curiosity about the impact sensitivity of blackpowder, I suggest a few simple "field" tests. First, go to the local hardware store and strap a can of your favorite granulation into the paint shaker! :shocking: Second, throw a can of BP into the air, and as it's coming back down, hit it with a baseball bat! :shocking: Third, take a can of BP and standing on a concrete driveway, throw it down on the ground as hard as you can! :shocking: As I am somewhat disinclined to perform these tests myself, I hereby offer $1.29 (why does that sound familiar?) to anyone willing to carry out these tests. Thanks..... :crackup: :crackup: :crackup: :crackup: :crackup: :crackup::thumbsup:
 
Other tests aimed at causing black powder to detonate which I have read about fired a .30-06 (or .308?) thru cans of powder.
All they got for the efforts was a lot of black powder spread over a large area.
No boom, no poof.
Of course the powder in the can was not compacted as it was in Dutch's example.

IMO, black powder is fairly safe stuff as long as it doesn't get heated up above 400 degrees F. but if it goes much over 400 degrees, hold on to your hat! :thumbsup:
 
Other tests aimed at causing black powder to detonate which I have read about fired a .30-06 (or .308?) thru cans of powder.

I have seen just them go up that way before, at the start of the zucchini shoots... (yes, a local farmer grows zucchinis for targets) :redthumb:

A 1 pound can of black powder was placed inside of a pumpkin and hit with a .223 hollow point...

Can you say, SMOKED PUMPKIN PIE?

I was the only one there with a muzzleloader, but I had the crowd's attention every time I touched it off... :haha:
 
Perhaps velocity of the projectile gong through the powder plays a part there. Back in the late 70's, a bloke in Terrace B.C., having a sporting good store, was in possession of several pounds of (Scotish)ICI FG. that he seemingly couldn't sell. IT sat on the shelf for years as no one would shoot it in their rifles as it was just too coarse, even for ctg. guns. The grains were HUGE rounded chunks of powder, more similar to what used to be pictured as canon grade than any rifle grade of powder. I have shot off lots of 1F or FG GOEX and the GOEX FG is barely 1/10 the size of this ICI stuff. I still have a bit of it, but it is low energy powder. IN my .58 Hawken, it took 200gr. to match the velocity of 150gr. 2F. The velocity was the same, but the 200gr. FG kicked more.
: Anyway, that's the background - he shot off some 8 lbs. of the stuff using his 7mm Rem with 120gr. handloads at 3,700fps, at the 100 yards line, For every shot, he got a large poof of white smoke. I do believe he shot the cans on-end through the steel lids. The sides of ICI cans are paper.
: I did not see this, but was told of it by him and he indicated the 7mm mag set them off by the bullet going through the can of powder. According to this thread, this isn't possible which is interesting as he had no reason to lie. When visiting Terrace on ahunting trip, I stopped in and asked him for BP. He said he'd only had ICIFG but he'd shot it all off - then laughed. I asked him what was funny, and he told me HOW & WHY he'd shot it off - with his 7mm Rem. At the time, in Smithers B.C., I had used it in my 50 3-1/4" Sharps at 170gr. per charge with 550 gr.RCBS bullets & the 45/70 at 80gr. IT was also more dense than GOEX powder.(more dense = heavier for same volume)
 
Anyway, that's the background - he shot off some 8 lbs. of the stuff using his 7mm Rem with 120gr. handloads at 3,700fps, at the 100 yards line, For every shot, he got a large poof of white smoke. I do believe he shot the cans on-end through the steel lids.

When that 7mm bullet went through the can's metal, it would make a spark, I'm sure this is what set off the powder...

Plus bullets are very hot, being fired from a gun and air resistance creates heat, heat transferred from the bullet to the powder could also aid ignition...
 
Regarding shock impact, that's how the Chinese muzzle loaders do it. They pour powder down the nipple and cover it with a piece of plastic (shopping bag and not expensive Saran Wrap). It's held in place by a piece of rubber salvaged from an inner tube.

I wrote an article on Muzzle Loading in China and submitted it along with photos to Muzzle Loader. Haven't heard anything from Scurlock yet.
 
While I don't understand the Chinese method mentioned below, I am quite certain the guilding metal of the bullet will not provoke a spark from the steel lid on the cans. It is very hot, though, the faster it's going, the hotter it will be. Goig through the steel lid will increase this heat considerably, and it is possible this heat, coupled with the impact, is what ignites the powder.
: I personally know a man who got hit in the back on the flack jacket, by a 147gr. 7.62X57 mil ctg. The bullet went through the back door, back seat and front seat before hitting him in the middle of the back. It stopped, fell down his pants and branded him on the butt. Yes it was hot from penetrating the steel door, from firing in the first place, and possibly from the fabric of the seats.
 
ouch....thats one hell of a trophy from the war i bet......................................bob
 
yeah - the brief standoff between the central B.C. Chilcos & the Mounties in 1990's or somewhere around there. He was a lucky man for sure. Although the bullet was almost spent, it might have paralized him if he'd not been wearing the vest with the tramma plates.
 
I have read all the posts on this thread,and would be of the opinion that the simple theory of a spark caused by the hammer (cock) being jarred and comming into contact with the frizzen (hammer) is the most stable of the theorys.I only have about ten years experience with B.P. and the Subs,but have been dealing with smokeless for over 50 yrs.There have been several experiments that are published on impact/compression sensitivity setting off B.P.and the Subs.none that I know of found it likely that it would ignite in a loading situation,even in a case such as mentioned.The compression theory heating the air under the projectile as it sped downbore under the hammer blows is not likely but can't be ruled out.Ed Yard did considerble testing,and His findings are published in Maj.Gearge nontes B.P.Manual (all His tests were performed useing barrels furnished by T.C.)Sam Fadala also includes a chapter on the subject in His B.P. Loading Manual.One of the tests performed was the powder laying loose in the bore this did (in some cases cause detonation rather than a burn(one reason to be carefull with squib loads)This is also a factor with smokeless powder.Well I've beat my gums enough.It pays to pay attention to all safe handleing practices :D
 
I suspect that the rush of air fanned a hot ember to life. There is a larger chance of this than compression causing the powder to go off. When a cannon is loaded for the second shot, the bore is swabbed with water to put out any lingering sparks, and then the gunner wearing a guard on his thumb uses it to plug the vent so that when the charged is rammed the rush of air doesn't fan a spark to life. The pistol had already been fired, the possibility of a spark was there. I've tried to set off black powder with a cigarett. It's not hot enough to set it off. Before friction primers and flint cannon locks, cannon were fired by pouring priming powder into the vent, and then touching it with a smoldering cotton wick (calle a match) that had been soaked in salt peter to keep it burning. The command just before the command to fire was "gunners, blow your matches". That fanned the spark to make it hot enough to ignite the priming. It's possible that the powder was dumped onto a spark not hot enough to set the powder off, but the rush of air fanned the spark and it fired.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top