Burn rate for smokeless propellants - Research results wanted

Dangermouse said:
Several years ago a link to a Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) publicly available pdf file was posted in another thread on this forum. That link is:
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/p004451.pdf

However, since then, DTIC has revamped its web interface and papers now have an "accession number", which usually begins with "ADA".

I would like to read this paper, which characterizes smokeless propellant burn rates in terms of temperature sensitivity. It is reported to contain some counterintuitive information about burn rates not found in the general marketing/sporting literature. In other words, it is useful science.

If anyone has a copy of this paper, or knows the current accession number, and can provide it to this thread, it is much appreciated.

Thanks.

Dangermouse
Click to expand...
I second that Danger!
 
FEENIX said:
For what it is worth ...

Click to expand...

It is always worth listening to Brian Litz. His work is systematic.

So let's examine what he says in light of some experimental results. See the graph embedded, which was extracted from https://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/shoot/tv6BR/index.htm. This figure captures data from experiments with several smokeless powders and relates the muzzle velocity to those temperatures. From that we can do two things: estimate the muzzle velocity increase/decrease as temperature changes for these powders, and tell whether a powder is single or double-base, from the explanation delivered by Dr. Litz.

1703280589100.png


Let's take two powders on this graph: Reloder 15 and AR Comp, which show the steepest and flattest changes over the range of temperature data were collected. Go to the link above and find the page with the data in spreadsheet form. It shows the slope for Reloder 15 is 1.47 (fps per degree increase in temp F) and 0.28 (fps per degree increase in temp F) for AR Comp.

Litz told us that -- as a rule of thumb -- powders that increase speed at a rate of 0-.5fps per degree are single base and those whose speed increases above .5fps per degree increase are double base.

Unfortunately, AR Comp is, according to the MSDS on Alliant's website, a double base powder. Oops.

While this raises other interesting questions, for me they have to be laid aside until we find the NSWC reference discussed very early in this thread. That may have some good info on ball powders, especially BL-C(2) and H335 in the heat.

-mouse
 
Dangermouse said:
It is always worth listening to Brian Litz. His work is systematic.

So let's examine what he says in light of some experimental results. See the graph embedded, which was extracted from https://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/shoot/tv6BR/index.htm. This figure captures data from experiments with several smokeless powders and relates the muzzle velocity to those temperatures. From that we can do two things: estimate the muzzle velocity increase/decrease as temperature changes for these powders, and tell whether a powder is single or double-base, from the explanation delivered by Dr. Litz.

View attachment 524322

Let's take two powders on this graph: Reloder 15 and AR Comp, which show the steepest and flattest changes over the range of temperature data were collected. Go to the link above and find the page with the data in spreadsheet form. It shows the slope for Reloder 15 is 1.47 (fps per degree increase in temp F) and 0.28 (fps per degree increase in temp F) for AR Comp.

Litz told us that -- as a rule of thumb -- powders that increase speed at a rate of 0-.5fps per degree are single base and those whose speed increases above .5fps per degree increase are double base.

Unfortunately, AR Comp is, according to the MSDS on Alliant's website, a double base powder. Oops.

While this raises other interesting questions, for me they have to be laid aside until we find the NSWC reference discussed very early in this thread. That may have some good info on ball powders, especially BL-C(2) and H335 in the heat.

-mouse
Click to expand...
You can probably request it via FOIA. If it was released publicly before, then it's probably not classified.

Unfortunately the Navy isn't usually quick to do anything, so, good luck…but it might work.
 
dfanonymous said:
You can probably request it via FOIA. If it was released publicly before, then it's probably not classified.

Unfortunately the Navy isn't usually quick to do anything, so, good luck…but it might work.
Click to expand...
Agreed. If I knew the title of the publication, I would have requested it. It probably would also have shown up in a direct search for the title on the DTIC web interface. The accession number is what is needed, and now they all begin with "ADA".

-mouse
 
Dangermouse said:
Ask and ye shall receive! Thank you.

I see it is 23 pages so I will print it and read it while waiting on Santa.

I also see that the filename I was seeking differs from that you posted. My version had an extra "4" init.

-mouse
Click to expand...
And to add to the confusion I only used one 4 in the body of my post. Anyway, Merry Christmas if that is what you are looking for.
 

Similar threads

L
Smokeless rifle propellants – burn rates
Replies
3
Views
2K
RT2506
R
M
burn rate
Replies
3
Views
1K
muliehunter
M
T
Burn rate range
2
Replies
15
Views
1K
Mike Matteson
M
crystalgayleguy
powder burn rate
Replies
4
Views
1K
338 dude
338 dude
R
burn rate charts
2
Replies
18
Views
4K
MudRunner2005
MudRunner2005

Recent Posts

Top