weighting in on volume

[Carbon 6]

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.

.

Sounds like standardization to me.

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

 

[Brent]

You are technically correct. There is no such thing as 1 grain of volume.
.

There is correct and incorrect. Technically.

There is NO standardization. Grab a bunch of different volumetric measures and compare them.

CVA vs TC - very different. They are just arbitrary units that sorta/kinda/maybe approximate what each company thinks should correspond to 1 gr of powder.

I was thinking I was using 90 grns of powder in my flintlock for years, but then weighed a charge and found it that I was really using 123 grs.

All powder measure does is provide an arbitrary amount of powder in a consistent fashion. It works fine for what it is, but there is no volume unit known as a grain. It is a unit of weight.

 

[Travler]

This seems to be a old old thread. I was reading from the beginning and back in '08 there was a reference:
Some members of the Long Range Muzzle Loader discussion list undertook some basic testing in 2001 to assess the Effects of Temperature, Humidity, and Barometric Pressure on Moisture content of Black Powder. You might find them of interest.
The link was to theopenrange.net and "The black powder library" - which seems to have evaporated... Does anyone have a copy of this to share?

This is a great topic and while I shoot from a bag mostly (volume measure), I am interested in the variances due to powder. I have several cans of powder that I regularly shoot with that are form the '70s, and I would like to understand more. Also I load PB cartages and would like to understand the vol/weight variance for a 32-20 and 44-40 etc. I will not say more on that as this is not the right place. Thanks, Travler

 

[wb78963]

Personally I work up loads by volume and could care less about weight. Especially when using BMZ because it is less dense that real Gunpowder.
Smokessomewhatless powders are a whole different story for another forum not here
Just sayin' Zonie just sayin'
I never touch the stuff, but my understanding is any of the other substitutes are the same less dense so use volumes, or better yet, use real Black Gunpowder and forget that rust in a bottle that burns..
The ones who came before us used volumes and if it was good enough for them it is good enough for us.
Don't try to invent a new wheel. the original one worked just fine.
Bunk

 

[ResearchPress]

The ones who came before us used volumes and if it was good enough for them it is good enough for us.

Except some didn’t - all depends on your application.

”Weigh every charge of powder carefully before going to the rifle range; for, unless you attend to this, your shooting will be irregular.” - Horatio Ross, Captain of the Scottish Eight for the Elcho Shield (long range team competition), The Scotsman, 14 April 1864. If it was good enough for them it is good enough for me.

David

 

[wb78963]

ZAP!!
OK David, you got me I learned something and I thank you for that
Bunk

 

[ResearchPress]

For the most part volumetric measures are sufficiently accurate - long range shooting is a specialed discipline. You may be interested in this Muzzle Loader Range Box from the 19thC and featured on my web site, equipped with phials for pre-weighed charges.

David

 

[TFoley]

I'm weighting the powder now in an effort to find the sweet load with my gun. I shot yesterday and found 80 grains weighted is dead nuts at 25 yards. That comes to 60 + with my brass volume measure. I'm just scooping it out of a bowl. When I am sure at what it likes, I will make a contraption to measure in the field. Joe

At 25 yards you may as well club that deer to death. It's not that much of a reach....

 

[Grenadier1758]

While pre-loading some powder, I pulled out my trusty Lee scoopers. On the scale it said, 70 grains use size xx. Well,I weight them and they came darn close to 70 grains. Next I used my really cool brass powder measure. The kind that a little pole drops out of the middle with load marking etched on it. I filled that up to 70 and then weight it, ~92 grains. So which one is right? I was using 3f swiss, if that makes a difference. Thanks for any help. Joe

I have a brass measure that I use with a valve on my powder can. The measure slides over the valve so there is extra volume in the measure not accounted for by the markings on the measure. If I use the measure away from the valve. It would measure more weight. One of the members of my gun club was using such a measure and he wanted to check it out against a scale. The results were much more powder in weight than indicated by the markings. I did the calculation of predicted weight of 2fg black powder based on the measured volume and the predicted results were very close to the weighed result.

Most of my measures are shown in this picture. My measure with the valve is on the left. Weights on a scale are pretty close to the grain weights marked on the measure.

Based on my experience, the Lee scoops would be providing the correct volume to weight measure.

 

[BlazingIron]

The term “grain” is a unit of weight and the graduated powder measure is of unknown unit of measure so let’s use it’s measurement as volume. I would associate each mark on the powder measure with the actual weight of the powder as measured on my scale. Then create a chart which relates the powder weight vs each mark on the powder measure. As far as what the actual load is I would go with what the scale says is the weight in grains that allows me to disregard the impact of volume on the load and also the variations of the differing grain sizes of different types of powder.

 

[stikshooter]

I agree it's not necessary. I don't weigh charges. I did it out of curiosity.
The point I was making for Mark is that it can be done with accurate weight to volume.

HD

There is a reason competitive shooters weigh charges (accuracy) ! I weigh charges for sameness as how it's dispensed matters and varies/Ed

 

[stikshooter]

The brass measure in not calibrated right. Swiss will weight heavier than the others but normally they weight light in a volume measure. It is possible that the measure you have was calibrated for a low density powder, bad powder lot or ???
In a ML weighed charges are OK and are probably best for absolute accuracy. But changing the charges a coupe of grains is unlikely to have any effect that can be seen by most shooters.

In cartridge guns weighing charges is largely useless. I know the charge weight so I can repeat it but cartridges are best loaded to equal volume to assure uniform compression.

Dan

Ever hear of drop tubes? (vibrating) gets 85+ grains 1 1/2 F in what normally fit's 70 grains by volume

 

[Rfp10000]

FYI, using Treso powder spouts .GG is Graff’s Goex & S is Swiss . The last column is the weight by scale for the listed spout. These were just single samples so not the last word.
To me volume spouts are for convenience to get an easy relatively repeatable charge. A scale won’t work in certain situations & is generally too tedious to use every time for anything I do. A scale simply gives more information for those that care to have it.

• 40gn spout 3F GG - 42.20
• 30gn spout 3F GG - 24.7
• 25gn spout 3F GG - 22.8
• 20gn spout 3F GG - 18.66
• 15gn spout 3F GG - 13.62
• ———————-
• 40gn spout 2F S - 45.50
• 30gn spout 2F S - 28.75
• 25gn spout 2F S - 26.52
• 20gn spout 2F S - 20.28
• 15gn spout 2F S - 15.22

 

[nhmoose]

While pre-loading some powder, I pulled out my trusty Lee scoopers. On the scale it said, 70 grains use size xx. Well,I weight them and they came darn close to 70 grains. Next I used my really cool brass powder measure. The kind that a little pole drops out of the middle with load marking etched on it. I filled that up to 70 and then weight it, ~92 grains. So which one is right? I was using 3f swiss, if that makes a difference. Thanks for any help. Joe

Lost me at Lee scoopers

 

[Grenadier1758]

While pre-loading some powder, I pulled out my trusty Lee scoopers. On the scale it said, 70 grains use size xx. Well,I weight them and they came darn close to 70 grains. Next I used my really cool brass powder measure. The kind that a little pole drops out of the middle with load marking etched on it. I filled that up to 70 and then weight it, ~92 grains. So which one is right? I was using 3f swiss, if that makes a difference. Thanks for any help. Joe

The Lee scoop and your weight scale. You may have an adjustable brass measure that was used with a valved spout that filled the measure. I evaluated a brass measure one of my club members had and it poured way more weight of powder on the scale than my adjustable measure. However, when I used my valved spout that fit into the adjustable measure, it poured the weight marked on the shaft. The measure on the left is the valved spout with the measure attached. The valved measure has a spout that takes up about 20 grains of equivalent black powder volume.

I have more info on my valved measure in post #109.

 

[longcruise]

Consistent repeatability is the name of the game. Leastways that's my way of looking at it.

Density vs weight is all over the place when you compare different brands and granulations of powder.

I might have some results of my bench top research filed somewhere. I'll try to find it.

 

[Rfp10000]

Also , you buy powder by weight , 7000 grains per pound. No matter what your spout measure says , you only get 7000 grains of shooting ( or spilling) out of a pound. I use a spout because it’s more convenient but I don’t really expect it to be exactly the same weight with each pour.

 

[longcruise]

If you are filling the spout and then dumping into the barrel, there are some safety concerns. An ember setting the powder off would be extremely rare but the consequences of a horn or flask going off would be very serious.

Another extremely rare event is a spark from a flinter entering the horn when the plug is not replaced. There are several cases of horns blowing up as they hang at th shooters side.

 

[longcruise]

Ok, I dug around the hard drive and found this. What I did was just set my RCBS powder measure at an arbitrary setting and threw all these charges from that same setting. It should give some ideas on the relationship between volume and weight.

Now here is also something to consider. One might think that the powders that weighed in heavier for the same volume would be the more energetic but that turned out to be not the case. I chronoed most of these powders in another experiment and I'll post that too later. But the results were pretty much as I expected based on my own experience shooting these powders. The swiss of course was the winner as far as velocity goes. Elephant which as you can see is the heaviest powder by weight was the least energetic and turned in the lowest velocities.

Graf 3f
55.9
55.5
55.5
55.3
-------
Avg 55.55
Std dev .25
ext sprd .60

Goex 2f
51.1
51.7
51.3
51.4
-------
Avg 51.37
Std dev .25
ext sprd .60

Goex 3f
52.2
52.1
52.5
52.2
--------
Avg 52.25
Std dev .17
Ext sprd .40

Elephant 2f
60.2
60.4
60.4
60.1
---------
Avg 60.27
Std dev .15
Ext sprd .30

Swiss 1.5f
55.9
56.1
56.4
56.2
------
Avg 56.15
Std dev .21
Ext sprd .50

Swiss 2f
57.4
57.2
57.2
57.4
-------
Avg 57.30
Std dev .12
Ext sprd .20

Pyrodex RS
37.0
37.1
37.5
36.8
-------
Avg 37.10
Std dev .29
Ext Sprd .70

 

[Trooper]

I intend on preweighing my charges with a scale then pouring my weighed charges into small vials like Idaho Lewis does. He’s using 80 grains Swiss and weighs by scale not volume. His shooting is pretty darned accurate sub MOA out to 1200 meters.