weighting in on volume

[ResearchPress]

Unfortunately, the link seems to be broken...

The quoted post containing the link is from 2008 - the data is no longer on line insofar as I know.

David

 

[GREENSWLDE]

I haven't shot competitive M/L for some time, but still always weigh charges & bullets as was advised by William Ellis Metford.If it was good enough for the Master,who am I to argue..
OLD DOG..

 

[Idaho Ron]

When i developed my loads I used 80 grains by volume. I was using pyrodex p. I filled the measure and tapped it until no more powder woukd go in.
That method gives my 64.5 actual grains.
I Set up a rifle for a friend. His rifle was exactly like mine. He had my bullets and was using the same powder and wads. But his rifle was not shooting the same. I asked him to weigh his charge. He was at 57 grains. He used my method of tapping and he got to 64.5 actual grains. Once he did that, then his rifle began shooting the same as mine. I weigh up all my speed loaders with a scale. But my method is very predictable using a volume measurer. I trust it for most of my shooting.

 

[ugly old guy]

I suspect my adjustible powder measure is volume rather than weight whether I'm shooting BP or Pyrodex.

I don't possess a postal scale to check the actual charge weight to set weight.

 

[Zonie]

The volume method of measuring out black powder loads is the way to go if you are using real black powder or Pyrodex or 777 or any of the other modern synthetic black powder replacements.

The replacement powders are made to produce somewhat similar velocities per cubic inch of volume as real black powder.

The actual weight of many of the synthetic BP is usually less. In the case of Pyrodex, it actually weighs only about 70% as much per cubic inch as real black powder. In fact, for a while, Pyrodex advertised on the label that you would get 30% more shots per pound, and because it is sold by the pound they were right.

That's why I advise people that they should never weigh out powder loads if they are using a synthetic black powder unless they already know how the density compares with real black powder.

(Example: 70 grains by weight of Pyrodex has the same volume and the same power as 100 grains of real black powder.)

 

[Carbon 6]

Mountain men didn't have scales.
Think about how corn is measured, It use to be measured by volume (bushels) but if you buy or sell corn today they weigh it and still call it bushels. this is because the weight has been standardized to a specific moisture content. (15.5%)

Black powder and substitutes have been similarly standardized only in the reverse.
We measure by volume but call label it in avoirdupois grains.

So just like you will never see a farmer today actually measuring his corn yield by filling a bushel basket, we too should not weigh our powder, but measure it by volume.

Powders have different weights/power but have been standardized to the same volume.

 

[Brent]

I suspect my adjustible powder measure is volume rather than weight whether I'm shooting BP or Pyrodex.

I don't possess a postal scale to check the actual charge weight to set weight.

Of course it is measuring volume. What else could it measure?

There is no volumetric unit called "Grains".

Volumetric powder measures have NOT been standardized to anything and different manufacturers have them scaled in all sorts of arbritrary units of of volume. Nor are powders standardized to anything. In fact, powder from different lots by the same manufacturer can vary widely in density, and hence the weight of powder dispensed at any particular setting on a volumetric measure.

How you "SHOULD" measure your powder is up to you. Those interested in obtaining the best precision possible generally weigh it.

 

[Tumbledown]

There is indeed a volumetric measurement for grains. Same as ounces. It's basedx on the weight of a given volume. One grain water by weight fills one grain volume just as one ounce water by weight fills one ounce.

BP is always a volume measurement first. For cartridge guns, the cartridge was designed for a specific volume.

 

[Carbon 6]

There is indeed a volumetric measurement for grains. Same as ounces. It's basedx on the weight of a given volume. One grain water by weight fills one grain volume just as one ounce water by weight fills one ounce.

BP is always a volume measurement first. For cartridge guns, the cartridge was designed for a specific volume.

Every form of measurement is standardized in some way, shape or form. Some also get re-defined over time.

 

[MSW]

I go by volume, which works for me. I would suspect that those who go by weight (as in, on a scale) also get good results because they use a specific and repeatable charge.

One guy's opinion, free and no doubt well worth the price

 

[OldJoe212]

The way the correct volume (not weight) was determined was by putting the correct ball in the flatten palm of your hand and covering it with powder. The bigger the ball, the more powder needed. I've tried this and it seems to work fairly well. Remember, these were backwoods folks without access to much technology. Don't overthink the process. It's been working for a couple hundred years.

 

[Tanglefoot]

This is fascinating. I didn't know there were that many ways to say the same thing, over and over. Buckskinners and other traditionalists measure their charges with volume measures, often using adjustable measures to find the charge(s) a barrel likes best, and then making a fixed measure to use in the field. That's the way the frontiersmen and mountain men did it .... it was practical and portable.
If there were variations in different batches of powder and they noticed, I'm guessing they would add or subtract a little until they found the "sweet spot" again. I can't imagine a Trapper or a Longhunter lugging a balance scale with him to weigh charges ...... ! Competition shooters seem to prefer whatever method will eliminate any variation from shot to shot, no matter how complex, or complicated it is. They are more painstaking because their mantra is "accuracy" and "precision" and you just ain't gonna get that with a piece of hollowed out antler.
Any modern reloader will tell you that the powder measures used for smokeless powder loads will not work for black powder! So will most retailers of such devices and most reloading manuals. That's just the way it is, y'all. That said, measuring my charges with that hollowed out antler tip generally allows my rifle to shoot better than I can once the "right" charge is found, and that's close enough for me.

 

[Brent]

There is indeed a volumetric measurement for grains. Same as ounces. It's basedx on the weight of a given volume. One grain water by weight fills one grain volume just as one ounce water by weight fills one ounce.

No. Just plain no.

 

[longcruise]

Volumetric powder measures have NOT been standardized to anything and different manufacturers have them scaled in all sorts of arbritrary units of of volume. Nor are powders standardized to anything. In fact, powder from different lots by the same manufacturer can vary widely in density, and hence the weight of powder dispensed at any particular setting on a volumetric measure.

I've posted this before and here it is again. this illustrates the actual weight of powders that are of the identical volume.

Take from it what you will.

BP Weight Comparisons done by measuring charges dropped from an RCBS measure at an arbitrary setting. Five charges averaged.

Graf 3f
55.9
55.5
55.5
55.3
-------
55.55

Goex 2f
51.1
51.7
51.3
51.4
-------
51.37

Goex 3f
52.2
52.1
52.5
52.2
--------
52.25

Elephant 2f
60.2
60.4
60.4
60.1
---------
60.27

Swiss 1.5f
55.9
56.1
56.4
56.2
------
56.15

Swiss 2f
57.4
57.2
57.2
57.4
-------
57.30

Pyrodex RS
37.0
37.1
37.5
36.8
-------
37.10

And, in support of what Idaho Ron said about tapping the measure to fine tune the charge, here is another bench top experiment.

Once again, take from it what you will.

Comparison of powder by weight when measure is tapped and untapped before leveling the measure.

First, the 10 that were poured and sheared without tapping the measure

93.5
94.1
93.2
92.5
92.8
93.6
94.0
92.8
93.5
92.2

93.2 Average Weight
.63 Standard Deviation
1.9 Extreme Spread

Next, the ten that were tapped and then sheared

94.3
94.2
93.5
93.9
93.8
94.1
94.1
94.0
94.1
94.3

94.0 Average Weight
.25 Standard Deviation
.8 Extreme Spread

 

[Zonie]

Longcruise
I couldn't help but notice in your data, the average weight of GOEX 2Fg powder and Pyrodex RS powder when measured by the same volume measure weighed, 51.37 grains (GOEX) and 37.10 grains (Pyrodex RS).
That makes the GOEX powder 27.78% heavier per cubic inch (or cubic centimeter) than the Pyrodex RS. That comes surprisingly close to the 30% difference in weight I mentioned in my earlier post.

 

[longcruise]

Yes, that popped out at me when I did this little experiment. It was done quite a long time ago and many of those powders may have different characteristics today. If you read any of the Mad Monk's writing on Goex history the quality was here and there over time. I don't think it reflects on the current quality of Goex though.

One might think the denser powders would give up the most power but velocity comparisons of these same powders showed that for Elephant, for example, the most dense, produced the lowest velocities.

I did a lot of experiments some years ago and it was enlightening, but I'm not so inclined to do so much any more. I had a lot of data that has been lost over the years because of HD problems.

 

[Tumbledown]

No. Just plain no.

No what? Measure 50 grains of water by volume and tell me how much it weighs.

 

[SDSmlf]

There is indeed a volumetric measurement for grains. Same as ounces. It's basedx on the weight of a given volume. One grain water by weight fills one grain volume just as one ounce water by weight fills one ounce.

BP is always a volume measurement first. For cartridge guns, the cartridge was designed for a specific volume.

Interesting observation. Please point us to the traceable NIST standard that explains this particular measurement. Have not seen or heard of it before and always hungry to learn. Sounds like something you might estimate when processing mash.

 

[Brent]

No what? Measure 50 grains of water by volume and tell me how much it weighs.

It would depend on which brand of powder measure I would use.

There is no such thing as 1 grain of volume.

 

[Zonie]

It would depend on which brand of powder measure I would use.

There is no such thing as 1 grain of volume.

You are technically correct. There is no such thing as 1 grain of volume.
There is however, "1 grain equivalent" of volume and its size depends on the density of what ever the solid, liquid or gas is that is being measured.

One cubic centimeter of water weighs about 15.43 grains. (The temperature of the water will change this value a little bit but this value is close enough for government work.)

One cubic inch equals about 16.387 cubic centimeters so one cubic inch of water weighs about 252.853 grains.

One cubic inch of black powder weighs about 250 grains depending on the size of the granules, the moisture content, which company made it and which batch of powder it is. All of these things effect the final density of black powder.

(That 250 grains per cubic inch is almost the same as the 252.853 grain density of water if anyone is interested.)

When we are talking about using a volume powder measure, we are talking about "grain equivalents" of volume.