early powder

[rabjr]

Iteresting! Was this plant captured then during the war? Not sure what I was trying to remember but it must of been when they tore it down years later.

 

[George]

Very interesting. You have taught me something I had never heard of, thanks.

Spence

 

[Tumblernotch]

It was never captured. When it was apparent that the War was pretty much over, they just shut everything down and went home. I believe the last day of production was April 19th. Lee had surrendered and they knew the bottom had fell out of the tub everywhere else. There was 70,000 lbs of finished powder on hand and when the Feds took it over after the War, they sent it to Fortress Monroe where it was used for artillery practice. I don't know how much of the 70,000 lbs was musket powder, but apparently a good bit was cannon powder. It was said that the yanks really liked it. :grin:

 

[Tumblernotch]

I learned some things too. I knew some things about Augusta, but I dug around and found some more. It's quite interesting when you read about it. I didn't know that the great chimney that was at the plant still existed and that just last year it was completely restored. If I ever get down that way I'd like to see it.

I also found that the powder works buildings were the only permanent buildings ever erected by the Confederate government. They were quite extensive and fronted more than a mile of the Augusta Canal. The "History of the Confederate Powder Works" by George Washington Rains goes into a good bit of detail about the process as well as the machinery used and the buildings. Rains' brother Gabriel James Rains, was a Brigadier General who is known for his use of "land torpedoes" or anti-personel mines during the Peninsula Campaign in 1862. He was severely criticized by both sides for their use, though later in the War they became more common. In 1863 and until the end of the War, he was occupied in arranging mine and torpedo defenses in Richmond, Mobile and Charleston. In Georgia these two men are known as the "Bomb Brothers".

 

[richard peterson]

I cannot add much to the wealth of information presented here. Ned Roberts in "The Muzzleloading Cap Lock Rifle" contends that in his time Curtis and Harvey "Diamond Grain" powder was the best, followed by Hazzard's "Kentucky Rifle" brand. "American Dead Shot" powder made by the American Powder Co. was rated highly also, as well as "Orange Extra" by Laflin and Rand Powder Co.

 

[yeoldcraftsman]

As to granulation, "bullets, shot, F FF FFF gunpowder" was offered in 1736.

I didn't know that. The best I've been able to find out is the following from DuPont's history. As best I could determine the 'standardization of granulation' (e.g., '3F') didn't really come into play in about 1825.

1804, United States
DUPONT POWDER MILL ESTABLISHED

DuPont established his first powder mill on Brandywine Creek, near Wilmington DE. The creek provided the power source, and cooling water for the mill.
DuPont's product was effective, but not the ultimate available. Most shooters preferred the "English Powder" still imported after the successful American Revolution.
In these times, "gunpowder" was just gunpowder. The granulation varieties we know today were not available as known classes of performance. One bought Joe's powder or Jim's powder because it worked better in ones particular arm. Governments bought a given powder because of its price and availability, or possibly the favor involved.
Among civilians, this Ford vs. Chevy fashion of thought persisted until recent times. Some individuals were very certain in espousing that Remington ammunition was far, far superior to that produced by Winchester, and vice versa.
DuPont, seeking success through broad acceptance by the public, worked diligently to formulate and then manufacture a powder superior to the competition. Did he succeed? Read on.
________________________________________
1810, United States
DUPONT BECOMES AMERICA'S LARGEST POWDER PRODUCER

What can you say about the world's leader in the products derived from applied chemistry? In six short years they ascended to the pinnacle of Black Powder production. As they entered the age of smokeless powder, they capitalized upon their chemical discoveries with that same skill and drive.
________________________________________
1825, Europe
DEVELOPMENT OF GRANULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES

With more accurate testing methods, it was discovered that different granulations of corned powder were appropriate to different applications. This ultimated in today's grading system using the letters "F" and "g". The little "g" stands for Granulation, while the F stands for the size of screen mesh the granule will pass through.
The smallest granulation commonly available is FFFFg (spoken: "4F"). It is used principally in the priming pan of flintlocks, but has some application in strong but small chambered revolvers of .22 to .32 caliber.
FFFg ("3F") is usually recommended for muzzleloading rifles of .50 caliber or less. FFg is used in larger rifles, whether cartridge loaded or not. It also performs well in target class loads in cartridge pistols when the smaller internal dimensioned modern cartridge case is used.
Large granulation is termed Fg and is used principally in cannons, though it is applicable to large bore (10 gauge and up) shotguns and double rifles of 8, 6, and 4 bore.
Cannon powder was commonly of an even larger granulation. Somewhat later, cannon powder was pressed into prisms, or sized to specifically fit the varying bores. Eventually "Brown" powder was standardized for in cannons until the end of 1800's. The brown color arose from incorporating charcoal that was only partially carbonized.

Interesting topic.

 

[Josh Smith]

Without listing all the ingredients, I'll mention that the saltpeter content used to be 6x% instead of today's 7x%.

When this changed, I am not sure, but while opinions differ, it would seem that the older stuff may have been lacking a bit in oxidizer.

Josh

How do you know, can you provide any proof.
The making of gunpowder was a closely guarded secret.
Any reports on just what the recipes were is pure guess.

Sorry I missed this.

Yes, I can provide proof. As was stated, there is plenty of documentation.

A lot of the early stuff contained 60% saltpeter.

As far as I can tell, I cannot post the recipe or the link... right folks?

Thanks,

Josh

 

[Josh Smith]

In all these years we haven't learned to make better powder?

Yeah we have.

Just pee on it and let it dry! :thumbsup:

Josh

 

[tg]

Is it correct that the type of wood used for the charcoal was pretty important to the quality of the end product? I seem to recall some issues about this in the last 10-15 years.

 

[Josh Smith]

Is it correct that the type of wood used for the charcoal was pretty important to the quality of the end product? I seem to recall some issues about this in the last 10-15 years.

I'm not an authority, Sir, but I would think so some softwoods simply burn more completely than other softwoods.

I have wondered what would happen if one were to use, say, cotton, or even process wood into paper first, then make paper charcoal.

I am not well enough versed in the art of making black powder to try making powder with alternate fuels, or, indeed, any black powders whatsoever.

Once when I was a kid, I was powder burnt by solid rocket fuel, and I do not wish to repeat the experience. My lungs are somewhat damaged from it, and it's not something I wish to risk again.

Josh

 

[Joel/Calgary]

Is it correct that the type of wood used for the charcoal was pretty important to the quality of the end product? I seem to recall some issues about this in the last 10-15 years.

Both the type of wood and the degree of carbonization - one does not want to burn off the creosotes. For those interested, I believe Bill Knight goes into this adequately in one of the sections of his articles on the Laflin & Rand site.

Regards,
Joel

 

[Tumblernotch]

Is it correct that the type of wood used for the charcoal was pretty important to the quality of the end product? I seem to recall some issues about this in the last 10-15 years.

I don't know about modern BP, but in the 1860's the powder made for the military in the US was made with charcoal made from willow and black alder. It was cut in the Spring when the sap was running. The branches used were no more than 3/4" in diameter and the bark was stripped as soon as it was cut. Any dead wood was rejected. I would say that the type of wood is very important, but even more, how it is prepared, stored and converted to charcoal. That combined with the quality of saltpetre would have a big impact on how thorough the combustion is and not keeping up with quality control in this area is probably why we hear complaints by many shooters about the excessive fouling found with some powders today. We also don't want to forget about the quality of the sulphur since all three components need to be as pure and high grade as possible, but I'd say the biggest problems arise in the charcoal and saltpetre qualities. I personally believe that overall the quality of today's powders may not be up to the standards of 19th Century powder (that made by the major makers) due to indifference on the manufacturer's parts. The people and military of the last couple of centuries depended on quality powder for their very lives while we merely use it for sport. That being said, I have no complaints about the GOEX, DuPont and Swiss powders I've used. (I used a limited amount of Elephant several years ago, and while it was a little dirtier it shot well enough. I understand that later batches were terrible, but by that time I was able to go back to GOEX). I would like to have a good batch of 19th Century to compare our modern powders with. I think we'd be surprised at the result.