Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
My HBN experience and process
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pdvdh" data-source="post: 2913139" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>Coat a bore and bullets with HBN and the MV drops, compared to the same exact load in the same rifle. Every time, in every rifle, I've applied HBN treatment. That's the universal experience.</p><p></p><p>Has Calvin stated he measures an increased MV after HBN treatment, with the identical load and powder charge? If so, that would be the first I've heard anyone experience that following HBN treatment.</p><p></p><p>My observation is; the size of the pressure vessel isn't static. It's dynamic as the bullet moves down the bore. I'm confident the integral of the area under the pressure curve will be reduced following HBN treatment.</p><p></p><p>The only possible explanation for reduced MV with reduced bore friction is the reduction of the integral of the area under the pressure curve. IMO, that reduction will be due to the dynamically changing size of the pressure vessel 'during the period of time' the bullet is within the bore.</p><p></p><p>Additionally, powder burn rate will undoubtedly be affected by the reduced peak pressures.</p><p></p><p>This may be the most comparable analogy:</p><p>Jam a bullet into the lands and peak pressures increase, causing increased MV. The additional bullet to bore friction caused by jamming the bullet into the lands alters the pressure curve.</p><p></p><p>Reduce the initial bullet to bore friction by jumping the bullet into the lands and peak pressure drops, as does MV.</p><p></p><p>Similarly, but not in the same exact manner, HBN reduces bullet to bore friction... >reducing pressure... >reducing MV...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 2913139, member: 4191"] Coat a bore and bullets with HBN and the MV drops, compared to the same exact load in the same rifle. Every time, in every rifle, I've applied HBN treatment. That's the universal experience. Has Calvin stated he measures an increased MV after HBN treatment, with the identical load and powder charge? If so, that would be the first I've heard anyone experience that following HBN treatment. My observation is; the size of the pressure vessel isn't static. It's dynamic as the bullet moves down the bore. I'm confident the integral of the area under the pressure curve will be reduced following HBN treatment. The only possible explanation for reduced MV with reduced bore friction is the reduction of the integral of the area under the pressure curve. IMO, that reduction will be due to the dynamically changing size of the pressure vessel 'during the period of time' the bullet is within the bore. Additionally, powder burn rate will undoubtedly be affected by the reduced peak pressures. This may be the most comparable analogy: Jam a bullet into the lands and peak pressures increase, causing increased MV. The additional bullet to bore friction caused by jamming the bullet into the lands alters the pressure curve. Reduce the initial bullet to bore friction by jumping the bullet into the lands and peak pressure drops, as does MV. Similarly, but not in the same exact manner, HBN reduces bullet to bore friction... >reducing pressure... >reducing MV... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
My HBN experience and process
Top